Survival rate and use of revision components in total knee arthroplasty following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty or proximal tibial osteotomy: an analysis of 11,983 procedures from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.43333Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Articular cartilage, Knee, Knee osteotomy, OsteoarthritisAbstract
Background and purpose: Unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee can be treated with high tibial osteotomy (HTO) or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). This study aimed to investigate the use of revision components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after HTO or UKA and to investigate the revision-free survival of the 2 groups of TKA at different time points, including reasons for revision.
Methods: TKAs after HTO and revision TKAs after failed UKA in the years 2007–2022 were selected from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. For complexity, the usage of revision components was analyzed. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was used to estimate survival rate. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to estimate the risk of revision, considering potential confounders. Indications of revision were evaluated.
Results: 11,983 procedures were analyzed (9,835 HTO-TKA and 2,148 UKA-TKA). In the HTO-TKA group, 3% had revision components in the TKA compared with 22% in the UKA-TKA group (P < 0.001). After 12 years’ follow-up the revision-free survival was 90.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 89.6–91.2) for HTO-TKA and 81.7% (CI 79.3–84.1) for UKA-TKA. The multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that UKA-TKA was a significant risk factor for a revision of the TKA (hazard ratio 2.3, CI 1.8–2.6), compared with HTO-TKA. In both groups the most frequent reason for revision was instability, followed by patellar pain and loosening of the tibial component.
Conclusion: TKAs after UKAs had higher use of revision components and a lower survival rate compared with TKAs following an HTO. The choice of surgical treatment should be considered for the young and active patient with unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis.
Downloads
References
Stam M, Verschueren J, van Outeren M V, Brouwer R W, Gaasbeek R D A, Blendea S G, et al. Unloader brace or high tibial osteotomy in the treatment of the young patient with medial knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Orthop 2025; 96: 102-9. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2025.42846. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.42846
Dietz F R, Kelman M G. Surgeon age as the major factor in recommendation of uni-compartmental knee replacement versus high tibial osteotomy: a case study in orthopaedic decision making. Iowa Orthop J 2012; 32: 22-7. PMID: 23576917
Cao Z, Mai X, Wang J, Feng E, Huang Y. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty vs high tibial osteotomy for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33(3): 952-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.10.025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.10.025
Santoso M B, Wu L. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, is it superior to high tibial osteotomy in treating unicompartmental osteoarthritis? A meta-analysis and systemic review. J Orthop Surg Res 2017; 12(1): 50-9. doi: 10.1186/s13018-017-0552-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-017-0552-9
Weidenhielm L, Olsson E, Broström L A, Börjesson-Hederström M, Mattsson E. Improvement in gait one year after surgery for knee osteoarthrosis: a comparison between high tibial osteotomy and prosthetic replacement in a prospective randomized study. Scand J Rehabil Med 1993; 25(1): 25-31. PMID: 8465162 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/1650197719932531
Stukenborg-Colsman C, Wirth C J, Lazovic D, Wefer A. High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental joint replacement in unicompartmental knee joint osteoarthritis: 7–10-year follow-up prospective randomised study. Knee 2001; 8(3): 187-94. doi: 10.1016/s0968-0160(01)00097-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0968-0160(01)00097-7
Brouwer R W, Huizinga M R, Duivenvoorden T, van Raaij T M, Verhagen A P, Bierma-Zeinstra S M, et al. Osteotomy for treating knee osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (12): CD004019. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004019.pub4
Zhang B, Qian H, Wu H, Yang X. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus high tibial osteotomy for medial knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2023; 31(1): doi: 10.1177/10225536231162829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10225536231162829
Song S J, Bae D K, Kim K I, Park C H. Long-term survival is similar between closed-wedge high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients with similar demographics. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27(4): 1310-19. doi: 10.1007/s00167-019-05390-w. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05390-w
Song S J, Bae D K, Kim K I, Lee C H. Conversion total knee arthroplasty after failed high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Relat Res 2016; 28(2): 89-98. doi: 10.5792/ksrr.2016.28.2.89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.2016.28.2.89
Vasso M, Corona K, D’Apolito R, Mazzitelli G, Panni A S. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: modes of failure and conversion to total knee arthroplasty. Joints 2017; 5(1): 44-50. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1601414. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1601414
Lee Y S, Kim H J, Mok S J, Lee O S. Similar outcome, but different surgical requirement in conversion total knee arthroplasty following high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Knee Surg 2019; 32(7): 686-700. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1666999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1666999
Shen G, Shen D, Fang Y, Li X, Cui L, Wei B, et al. Clinical outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty after high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop Surg 2022; 14(8): 1549-57. doi: 10.1111/os.13311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/os.13311
Lee J, Tay M L, Frampton C M, Young S W. Clinical and functional outcomes of TKA after HTO or UKA: a New Zealand Joint Registry Study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2024; 144(9): 4095-100. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05302-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-024-05302-9
von Elm E, Altman D G, Egger M, Pocock S J, Gøtzsche P C, Vandenbroucke J P, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147(8): 573-7. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010
LROI – Completeness of reported procedures in the population-based Dutch Arthroplasty Register (https://www.lroi.nl/jaarrapportage/dataquality/completeness/). Available at: https://www.lroi.nl/jaarrapportage/data-quality/completeness/
van Steenbergen L N, Denissen G A W, Spooren A, van Rooden S M, van Oosterhout F J, Morrenhof J W, et al. More than 95% completeness of reported procedures in the population-based Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2015; 86(4): 498-505. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2015.1028307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1028307
Denissen G A W, van Steenbergen L N, Lollinga W T, Verdonschot N J J, Schreurs B W, Nelissen R G H H. Generic implant classification enables comparison across implant designs: the Dutch Arthroplasty Register implant library. EFORT Open Rev 2019; 4(6): 344-50. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180063. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180063
van Raaij T M, Bakker W, Reijman M, Verhaar J A. The effect of high tibial osteotomy on the results of total knee arthroplasty: a matched case control study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2007; 8: 74. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-8-74
Pearse A J, Hooper G J, Rothwell A G, Frampton C. Osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty converted to total knee arthroplasty: data from the New Zealand Joint Registry. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27(10): 1827-31. doi; 10.1016/j.arth.2012.05.031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2012.05.031
Robertsson O, W-Dahl A. The risk of revision after TKA is affected by previous HTO or UKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473(1): 90-3. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3712-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-3712-9
El-Galaly A, Nielsen P T, Kappel A, Jensen S L. Reduced survival of total knee arthroplasty after previous unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared with previous high tibial osteotomy: a propensity-score weighted mid-term cohort study based on 2,133 observations from the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. Acta Orthop 2020; 91(2): 177-83. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2019.1709711. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2019.1709711
Duan G, Liu C, Lin W, Shao J, Fu K, Niu Y, et al. Different factors conduct anterior knee pain following primary total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33(6): 1962-71.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.12.024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.12.024
Sarraf K M, Konan S, Pastides P S, Haddad F S, Oussedik S. Bone loss during revision of unicompartmental to total knee arthroplasty: an analysis of implanted polyethylene thickness from the National Joint Registry data. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28(9): 1571-4. doi: 10.1016/j DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.02.003
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Maarten R Huizinga, Astrid J de Vries, Liza N van Steenbergen, Reinoud W Brouwer
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PlumX (by Elsevier) is an altmetrics platform that tracks and visualizes the online attention, usage, captures, citations, and social media engagement.
